<p>Flores and Rosa, in their leading piece, state that one of their main motivations in “undoing” raciolinguistics is their wariness of it becoming siloed as something “raciolinguists” do. As a sociolinguist whose work is primarily classified (with my consent) as various admixtures of queer linguistics, feminist linguistics, and (in my work bridging sociolinguistics and intersex studies) embodied sociolinguistics, I can sympathize acutely with the imposed siloing of critical areas. A feminist linguistic perspective on analysis or a queer linguistic perspective on analysis can be deployed by any scholar (as can a raciolinguistic perspective).</p><p>Before the undoing of raciolinguistics began, in my own work I had realized the value of applying a raciolinguistic perspective to studies of language and embodied sexuality. I applied the raciolinguistic perspective on perceiving subjects to explain how sexual embodiment, linguistic cues, identities, and race are reciprocal, and in confluence, extending the toolbox to talk about “cisheteropatriarchal” perceiving subjects (King, <span>2019</span>). Under this gaze, the embodied practices of those who fall outside of a normative view of what it means to look and act like a straight man become overdetermined (e.g., intersex bodies as well as female bodies and even male <i>commodified</i> bodies), and a lot more is read into their shapes and movements than with normative bodies. It proved very fruitful to bring a raciolinguistic perspective into this embodied sociolinguistic work on sexualized bodies.</p><p>Anticipating these issues, Lal Zimman (<span>2021</span>) has recently written about <i>trans linguistics</i>, a project that is not just for trans thinkers, he suggests, but for those who wish to thoroughly divest from transphobic worldviews while materially investing in the well-being of trans humans. At the same time, in a statement compatible with the leading piece, Zimman argues that trans linguists need to address needs and questions raised by thinkers and activists who are similarly engaged with interrogating racialization and other marginalizing implications for language use (Zimman, <span>2021</span>). So as with Flores and Rosa, there is a sense that the pervasive role of race in worldwide colonialism has injected the relevance of whiteness (and white supremacy) into trans linguistics as well. Serendipitously, Flores and Rosa here draw on the influential work of Riley Snorton (<span>2017</span>), who has emphasized the need to ask what “pasts” have been submerged and discarded to conceal the relevance of race to the sociohistorical development of trans. They adopt that standpoint by asking similar questions about race and linguistics, finding similar concealments. The “colonial co-naturalization” and “joint emergence” of racial and linguistic categories and hierarchies are emphasized in the leading piece, and they remind readers that European colonial logics link European-ness to orderly homog
{"title":"Beyond undoing raciolinguistics—Biopolitics and the concealed confluence of sociolinguistic perspectives","authors":"Brian W. King","doi":"10.1111/josl.12640","DOIUrl":"10.1111/josl.12640","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Flores and Rosa, in their leading piece, state that one of their main motivations in “undoing” raciolinguistics is their wariness of it becoming siloed as something “raciolinguists” do. As a sociolinguist whose work is primarily classified (with my consent) as various admixtures of queer linguistics, feminist linguistics, and (in my work bridging sociolinguistics and intersex studies) embodied sociolinguistics, I can sympathize acutely with the imposed siloing of critical areas. A feminist linguistic perspective on analysis or a queer linguistic perspective on analysis can be deployed by any scholar (as can a raciolinguistic perspective).</p><p>Before the undoing of raciolinguistics began, in my own work I had realized the value of applying a raciolinguistic perspective to studies of language and embodied sexuality. I applied the raciolinguistic perspective on perceiving subjects to explain how sexual embodiment, linguistic cues, identities, and race are reciprocal, and in confluence, extending the toolbox to talk about “cisheteropatriarchal” perceiving subjects (King, <span>2019</span>). Under this gaze, the embodied practices of those who fall outside of a normative view of what it means to look and act like a straight man become overdetermined (e.g., intersex bodies as well as female bodies and even male <i>commodified</i> bodies), and a lot more is read into their shapes and movements than with normative bodies. It proved very fruitful to bring a raciolinguistic perspective into this embodied sociolinguistic work on sexualized bodies.</p><p>Anticipating these issues, Lal Zimman (<span>2021</span>) has recently written about <i>trans linguistics</i>, a project that is not just for trans thinkers, he suggests, but for those who wish to thoroughly divest from transphobic worldviews while materially investing in the well-being of trans humans. At the same time, in a statement compatible with the leading piece, Zimman argues that trans linguists need to address needs and questions raised by thinkers and activists who are similarly engaged with interrogating racialization and other marginalizing implications for language use (Zimman, <span>2021</span>). So as with Flores and Rosa, there is a sense that the pervasive role of race in worldwide colonialism has injected the relevance of whiteness (and white supremacy) into trans linguistics as well. Serendipitously, Flores and Rosa here draw on the influential work of Riley Snorton (<span>2017</span>), who has emphasized the need to ask what “pasts” have been submerged and discarded to conceal the relevance of race to the sociohistorical development of trans. They adopt that standpoint by asking similar questions about race and linguistics, finding similar concealments. The “colonial co-naturalization” and “joint emergence” of racial and linguistic categories and hierarchies are emphasized in the leading piece, and they remind readers that European colonial logics link European-ness to orderly homog","PeriodicalId":51486,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sociolinguistics","volume":"27 5","pages":"436-440"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2023-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/josl.12640","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136114057","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
<p>El enfoque raciolingüístico de Flores y Rosa brinda un importante marco político, histórico, relacional y sensorial para entender cómo se racializan las personas y cómo la acción social se vuelve interpretable a través de un lente racializado. Me baso en este análisis para subrayar la importancia de que estudios que se enfoquen en la raza y el lenguaje consideren un análisis multivectorial que sea dinámico, histórico y consciente de las complejas relaciones de poder involucradas en vincular la raza y el lenguaje. Según entiendo, el argumento de Flores y Rosa es un llamado a evitar un enfoque analítico que trate la raza y su relación con el lenguaje como categorías ahistóricas descontextualizadas a través del espacio y el tiempo.</p><p>La atención a la interfaz sensorial que impacta cómo se experimenta la raza en forma interactiva también significa prestar atención a las circunstancias históricas y las relaciones de poder que producen la raza como una categoría perceptible de diferenciación social, ya sea través de aspectos del habla y el lenguaje, la apariencia física, la ascendencia genealógica, y/o cualquier característica que se asocie históricamente con categorías raciales en un lugar y tiempo determinado. Esto requiere el reconocimiento y análisis simultáneo de la raza como una construcción colonial, como un ancla de las relaciones sociales, y una base para ciertas formas de identidad. En este ensayo, discuto brevemente las categorías raciales como órdenes coloniales complejos y multifacéticos, luego destaco un marco multivectorial que, al reconocer la multidimensionalidad de la instanciación racial, permite un análisis de cómo la raza y su relación con los fenómenos lingüísticos podrían construirse, experimentarse, reproducirse y ser desafiados.</p><p>Pensar en la colonialidad como productora de los órdenes sociales modernos que a su vez producen la raza como importante vector y representante de las experiencias socioculturales a través de diferentes situaciones históricas y geopolíticas nos permite ver, analíticamente, cómo estas categorías producen también intersticios y vacíos donde las limitaciones y excesos de las categorías presupuestas son insuficientes y no corresponden claramente a conceptualizaciones y experiencias identitarias y lingüísticas vividas. Con el objetivo de comprender las formas multifacéticas y duraderas en que los proyectos coloniales europeos han estructurado sistemas de conocimiento, jerarquías y cultura para reproducir el poder colonial eurocéntrico, debemos preguntarnos: ¿qué se borra, excluye, o sobredetermina en las amplias categorías de lenguaje y raza que usamos para trazar patrones demográficos?</p><p>En este contexto, las discusiones sobre raza pueden entenderse con relación a los modos distintivos de organizar diferencia dentro de la colonialidad. El concepto de colonialidad (Quijano, <span>2000</span>) apunta a las condiciones epistemológicas que se configuran según las circunstancias político-económi
这表明真诚种族区分解析种族概念的真实性和考虑把“如何的人,他的思考和感觉的身分存在明显,尤其是当这种身份境内活动的社会环境,包括许多中和超出其立即控制”(11)。这个观点显示个人的复杂关系与他们的祖先是熟人和陌生人的种族类别分配,额,和无数思考模式种族和种族命令通过geohistóricas轨迹和政治边界,而通过这些移动的人。人们如何与种族联系的这一方面提醒我们，种族、身份和语言之间的关系不是停滞不前的，也不总是容易通过外部感知行为进行评估。第三个向量讨论了感知他人与种族评估的可感知和可知性方面的关系，并将种族类别分配给他人。这一向量强调了种族秩序和等级是如何在结构上复制的，而不管社会行动者是否经历了种族方面的互动，例如种族偏见的经验和产生。简·希尔(Jane Hill, 2008)等人(Chun, 2016, Pardo, 2013)的著作《白人种族主义的日常语言》(Everyday Language of White Racism, 2008)展示了关于种族主义起源的不同理论如何阐明种族主义被假定运作的机制和规模，无论是个人的、人际的还是结构性的。这种方法还强调了对种族的制度和互动看法如何影响在特定类别中种族化的社会行动者，以及这如何导致种族类别的复制和影响。第四个方面考虑了以前关系的相互作用，考虑到围绕种族化经历的群体和传统的历史形成。如果形成了这样的群体，他们如何根据共同的故事和经验定义包容?这些标准如何与自己和他人对类别、可居住性和种族秩序的感知相关联?这就是我们在类别和归属方面看到的关于种族的争论，也许更接近于关于“真实性”的争论，杰克逊对比了他的真诚概念。我们看到的不是与种族类别和主张的内在关系，而是种族身份和认同的关系评估，通常在Bucholtz和Hall(2005)提出的身份和互动框架内发挥作用。这个过程总是充满了分离的潜力(Meek, 2011)，以及行动者如何建立种族类别和问题的差异。考虑各个流程和媒介参与实验的读取物化身体作为一个网站内种族和争议性的分类更为广泛的命令殖民地,使我们能够动态定位中的加工过程coarticulación种族类别和尸体racializados lingüísticas和声音instanciadas品种(小国,2020年)。它还允许我们探讨在这些背景下，人们如何与(或不)不同形式的主体性和种族身份相关。在这方面,有必要仔细分析以一起interaccionales背景、相关大风,地缘政治等方面讨论试图系种族和种族成员通过标准从特征显现出来、物理和声乐estilizaciones conceptualizaciones族谱、想法、做法和传统遗产。这种分析为我们提供了一个想法，即在地缘政治边界内和跨越地缘政治边界的运动可能会以不同的方式突出或掩盖社会行动者以前在其他种族秩序中的定位方式。它还使我们能够辨别人们对种族、民族和语言类别和界限的不同和复杂的定位方式。最后，它揭示了相互联系的种族和语言秩序如何随着时间和空间的变化而变化，为不同的政治和经济项目服务。
{"title":"Enfoques raciolingüísticos y análisis multidimensionales de los vínculos entre la raza, el lenguaje y el poder","authors":"Sherina Feliciano-Santos","doi":"10.1111/josl.12645","DOIUrl":"10.1111/josl.12645","url":null,"abstract":"<p>El enfoque raciolingüístico de Flores y Rosa brinda un importante marco político, histórico, relacional y sensorial para entender cómo se racializan las personas y cómo la acción social se vuelve interpretable a través de un lente racializado. Me baso en este análisis para subrayar la importancia de que estudios que se enfoquen en la raza y el lenguaje consideren un análisis multivectorial que sea dinámico, histórico y consciente de las complejas relaciones de poder involucradas en vincular la raza y el lenguaje. Según entiendo, el argumento de Flores y Rosa es un llamado a evitar un enfoque analítico que trate la raza y su relación con el lenguaje como categorías ahistóricas descontextualizadas a través del espacio y el tiempo.</p><p>La atención a la interfaz sensorial que impacta cómo se experimenta la raza en forma interactiva también significa prestar atención a las circunstancias históricas y las relaciones de poder que producen la raza como una categoría perceptible de diferenciación social, ya sea través de aspectos del habla y el lenguaje, la apariencia física, la ascendencia genealógica, y/o cualquier característica que se asocie históricamente con categorías raciales en un lugar y tiempo determinado. Esto requiere el reconocimiento y análisis simultáneo de la raza como una construcción colonial, como un ancla de las relaciones sociales, y una base para ciertas formas de identidad. En este ensayo, discuto brevemente las categorías raciales como órdenes coloniales complejos y multifacéticos, luego destaco un marco multivectorial que, al reconocer la multidimensionalidad de la instanciación racial, permite un análisis de cómo la raza y su relación con los fenómenos lingüísticos podrían construirse, experimentarse, reproducirse y ser desafiados.</p><p>Pensar en la colonialidad como productora de los órdenes sociales modernos que a su vez producen la raza como importante vector y representante de las experiencias socioculturales a través de diferentes situaciones históricas y geopolíticas nos permite ver, analíticamente, cómo estas categorías producen también intersticios y vacíos donde las limitaciones y excesos de las categorías presupuestas son insuficientes y no corresponden claramente a conceptualizaciones y experiencias identitarias y lingüísticas vividas. Con el objetivo de comprender las formas multifacéticas y duraderas en que los proyectos coloniales europeos han estructurado sistemas de conocimiento, jerarquías y cultura para reproducir el poder colonial eurocéntrico, debemos preguntarnos: ¿qué se borra, excluye, o sobredetermina en las amplias categorías de lenguaje y raza que usamos para trazar patrones demográficos?</p><p>En este contexto, las discusiones sobre raza pueden entenderse con relación a los modos distintivos de organizar diferencia dentro de la colonialidad. El concepto de colonialidad (Quijano, <span>2000</span>) apunta a las condiciones epistemológicas que se configuran según las circunstancias político-económi","PeriodicalId":51486,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sociolinguistics","volume":"27 5","pages":"468-472"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2023-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/josl.12645","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136115935","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Figures of interpretation. B. A. S. S. Meier-Lorente-Muth-Duchêne, Bristol & Blue Ridge Summit: Multilingual Matters. 2021. 176 pp. Hardback (9781788929394) 29.95 GBP, Ebook/ PDF (9781788929400) 5.00 GBP.","authors":"Ingrid de Saint-Georges","doi":"10.1111/josl.12648","DOIUrl":"10.1111/josl.12648","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51486,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sociolinguistics","volume":"28 4","pages":"88-91"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2023-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136142846","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Os movimentos da perspectiva raciolinguística no sul latino-americano","authors":"Luanda Rejane Soares Sito","doi":"10.1111/josl.12641","DOIUrl":"10.1111/josl.12641","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51486,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sociolinguistics","volume":"27 5","pages":"458-462"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2023-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136113155","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The movements of the raciolinguistic perspective in the Latin American South","authors":"Luanda Rejane Soares Sito","doi":"10.1111/josl.12647","DOIUrl":"10.1111/josl.12647","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51486,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sociolinguistics","volume":"27 5","pages":"453-457"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2023-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136115949","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this commentary, we discuss common pitfalls associated with the study of race and language, focusing specifically on the recent emergence of raciolinguistics as a frame for these efforts. We examine how raciolinguistics can be taken up in ways that silo discussions of race from the rest of linguistics—as something that the “raciolinguists” do—such that careful study of issues including colonialism, power, and societal hierarchies is perpetually pushed to the margins of the field. We also consider how the nominalization of raciolinguistics can suggest that race and language are agreed upon objects in ways that reproduce troublesome essentializations. We show how a raciolinguistic perspective can resist such tendencies by continually interrogating the colonial reproduction and transformation of modern knowledge projects and lifeways across societal contexts, as well as by continually examining the fundamental nature of language, race, and power. We end with what we see as the implications of a raciolinguistic perspective for all of linguistics.
{"title":"Undoing raciolinguistics","authors":"Nelson Flores, Jonathan Rosa","doi":"10.1111/josl.12643","DOIUrl":"10.1111/josl.12643","url":null,"abstract":"<p>In this commentary, we discuss common pitfalls associated with the study of race and language, focusing specifically on the recent emergence of raciolinguistics as a frame for these efforts. We examine how raciolinguistics can be taken up in ways that silo discussions of race from the rest of linguistics—as something that the “raciolinguists” do—such that careful study of issues including colonialism, power, and societal hierarchies is perpetually pushed to the margins of the field. We also consider how the nominalization of raciolinguistics can suggest that race and language are agreed upon objects in ways that reproduce troublesome essentializations. We show how a raciolinguistic perspective can resist such tendencies by continually interrogating the colonial reproduction and transformation of modern knowledge projects and lifeways across societal contexts, as well as by continually examining the fundamental nature of language, race, and power. We end with what we see as the implications of a raciolinguistic perspective for all of linguistics.</p>","PeriodicalId":51486,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sociolinguistics","volume":"27 5","pages":"421-427"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2023-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136114681","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
<p>The quite contemporary epistemological postures that are critical of the dominance of Euro-modernist knowledge traditions are sometimes guilty of inadvertently perpetuating the very same hegemonies they seek to unsettle. For this reason, the intervention by Nelson Flores and Jonathan Rosa is timely and relevant. In re-assessing the “common sense” assumptions that belie the concept of “raciolinguistics,” Flores and Rosa remind us of the need to pitch our conversations with boldness, conceptual clarity, and conviction to avoid essentialisms that tend to hide and reveal—in equal measure—the co-naturalization of language and race and the concomitant discourses they invoke. This short commentary engages their reflections.</p><p>More than two decades ago, Latin American decolonial theorist, philosopher, and semiotician Walter D. Mignolo (<span>2002</span>) published an article on “The Geopolitics of Knowledge and the Colonial Difference.” In the article, Mignolo introduced several concepts that are foundational to the arguments that Nelson Flores and Jonathan Rosa advance. Included among the concepts introduced by Mignolo is “colonial difference,” “repetition without difference,” “the double bind,” “border thinking,” “relocation of thinking,” “critical awareness of the geopolitics of knowledge,” “Eurocentrism from the left,” and “Eurocentric critique of modernity,” among others. Together, and individually, these concepts point to the conundrum that contemporary social science and allied scholarly communities face in trying to transcend meta-narratives of Euro-modernist coloniality—in ways that do not reproduce the same. When Mignolo introduced these concepts, he was drawing attention to the fact that while the postmodern criticism of Euro-modernity is important and necessary, it is not enough. His call was for the development of alternative grammars and vocabularies that are fit for purpose—ones that would enable us to side step the language of colonial dichotomies and fallacies of superiority, linearity, completeness, and universal relevance.</p><p>In re-engaging and troubling the concept of “raciolinguistics,” Nelson Flores and Jonathan Rosa follow the path of reflexive praxis charted by Walter Mignolo and other decolonial theorists. They are inviting us to enter dialogic conversation on the imperative to think otherwise, to think anew, those rarely challenged “commonsense” assumptions that underpin the work we do in sociolinguistics and allied fields of study. It is an invitation to change not only the conversation but also the contents of our conversations. Flores and Rosa urge us to embark on delinking—a project that confronts the dangers of global coloniality and hierarchies of humanity, race, languages, and knowledges. They are inviting us to undertake a broader global review of our practices to ascertain how we got to be where we are as well as the steps we might take to pick ourselves up and continue walking. Or, as postcolonial literary cr
{"title":"Troubling sociolinguistics practice and the coloniality of universalism","authors":"Finex Ndhlovu","doi":"10.1111/josl.12644","DOIUrl":"10.1111/josl.12644","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The quite contemporary epistemological postures that are critical of the dominance of Euro-modernist knowledge traditions are sometimes guilty of inadvertently perpetuating the very same hegemonies they seek to unsettle. For this reason, the intervention by Nelson Flores and Jonathan Rosa is timely and relevant. In re-assessing the “common sense” assumptions that belie the concept of “raciolinguistics,” Flores and Rosa remind us of the need to pitch our conversations with boldness, conceptual clarity, and conviction to avoid essentialisms that tend to hide and reveal—in equal measure—the co-naturalization of language and race and the concomitant discourses they invoke. This short commentary engages their reflections.</p><p>More than two decades ago, Latin American decolonial theorist, philosopher, and semiotician Walter D. Mignolo (<span>2002</span>) published an article on “The Geopolitics of Knowledge and the Colonial Difference.” In the article, Mignolo introduced several concepts that are foundational to the arguments that Nelson Flores and Jonathan Rosa advance. Included among the concepts introduced by Mignolo is “colonial difference,” “repetition without difference,” “the double bind,” “border thinking,” “relocation of thinking,” “critical awareness of the geopolitics of knowledge,” “Eurocentrism from the left,” and “Eurocentric critique of modernity,” among others. Together, and individually, these concepts point to the conundrum that contemporary social science and allied scholarly communities face in trying to transcend meta-narratives of Euro-modernist coloniality—in ways that do not reproduce the same. When Mignolo introduced these concepts, he was drawing attention to the fact that while the postmodern criticism of Euro-modernity is important and necessary, it is not enough. His call was for the development of alternative grammars and vocabularies that are fit for purpose—ones that would enable us to side step the language of colonial dichotomies and fallacies of superiority, linearity, completeness, and universal relevance.</p><p>In re-engaging and troubling the concept of “raciolinguistics,” Nelson Flores and Jonathan Rosa follow the path of reflexive praxis charted by Walter Mignolo and other decolonial theorists. They are inviting us to enter dialogic conversation on the imperative to think otherwise, to think anew, those rarely challenged “commonsense” assumptions that underpin the work we do in sociolinguistics and allied fields of study. It is an invitation to change not only the conversation but also the contents of our conversations. Flores and Rosa urge us to embark on delinking—a project that confronts the dangers of global coloniality and hierarchies of humanity, race, languages, and knowledges. They are inviting us to undertake a broader global review of our practices to ascertain how we got to be where we are as well as the steps we might take to pick ourselves up and continue walking. Or, as postcolonial literary cr","PeriodicalId":51486,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sociolinguistics","volume":"27 5","pages":"449-452"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2023-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/josl.12644","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136114226","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
<p>En 2023, me invitaron a dar una charla sobre el resurgimiento del pensamiento deficitario en las escuelas de Inglaterra y cómo las políticas educativas contemporáneas reproducen ideologías raciolingüísticas, las cuales enmarcan las prácticas lingüísticas de les niñes racializades y de clase trabajadora como si estuvieran sufriendo de carencias debilitantes. Después de la charla, un profesor blanco comentó que el pensamiento deficitario trataba más de la clase que la raza, y que los estudios que se enfocan en la raza corrían el riesgo de minimizar las luchas sociolingüísticas de la clase trabajadora blanca. He sido testigo del despliegue de las mismas ansiedades en la evaluación por pares, donde les sociolingüistes del Reino Unido parecen incomódes por los estudios que centran la raza y el colonialismo, a pesar de las lógicas coloniales que se encuentran al centro de la disciplina (Heller y McElhinny <span>2022</span>). Esto es particularmente preocupante dado que la sociolingüística surgió simultáneamente con la organización anticolonial del Movimiento de Poder Negro en los años 1960, lo cual representaba el activismo comunitario que involucraba la exposición de la vigilancia antinegra sistémica de las prácticas lingüísticas en las escuelas.</p><p>El artículo de Flores y Rosa en el presente diálogo expresa cómo una perspectiva raciolingüística nos invita a interrogar las raíces coloniales de la sociolingüística y cómo se han empujado los asuntos de la raza, el colonialismo y la supremacía blanca a los márgenes disciplinarios. Una perspectiva raciolingüística busca deshacer asunciones dadas por sentadas sobre la lengua, la raza y la clase para interrogar cómo las lógicas coloniales británicas siguen dando forma a la sociedad moderna. Este enfoque interseccional ha sido fundamental al surgimiento de una perspectiva raciolingüística desde el Reino Unido que ha examinado la naturaleza mutuamente constitutiva de la raza, la clase y la lengua en contextos diferentes, incluyendo en las escuelas (Cushing, <span>2022</span>; Cushing y Snell, <span>2023</span>; Li Wei y García <span>2022</span>), en el proceso de ciudadanía del Reino Unido (Khan, <span>2021</span>), en la terapia del lenguaje, fonoaudiología y logopedia (<span>Farah f.c</span>.) y en zonas urbanas con altas poblaciones del sur de Asia (Sharma, <span>2016</span>; véase también Harris, <span>2006</span>). Estas investigaciones continúan una historia larga de estudios producidos por académiques marginalizades que expusieron cómo las lógicas coloniales y supremacistas blancos deslegitimaron las practicas lingüísticas de comunidades racializadas a mediados del siglo XX (p. ej., Coard, <span>1971</span>; Singh, <span>1988</span>). Sin embargo, estos nombres son típicamente borrados en los relatos históricos de les sociolingüistes del Reino Unido (véase Gilmour, <span>2020</span> para una excepción) de la misma manera en que el colonialismo y la antinegrura a menudo se pasan por alto en proyec
{"title":"Una perspectiva raciolingüística desde el Reino Unido","authors":"Ian Cushing","doi":"10.1111/josl.12637","DOIUrl":"10.1111/josl.12637","url":null,"abstract":"<p>En 2023, me invitaron a dar una charla sobre el resurgimiento del pensamiento deficitario en las escuelas de Inglaterra y cómo las políticas educativas contemporáneas reproducen ideologías raciolingüísticas, las cuales enmarcan las prácticas lingüísticas de les niñes racializades y de clase trabajadora como si estuvieran sufriendo de carencias debilitantes. Después de la charla, un profesor blanco comentó que el pensamiento deficitario trataba más de la clase que la raza, y que los estudios que se enfocan en la raza corrían el riesgo de minimizar las luchas sociolingüísticas de la clase trabajadora blanca. He sido testigo del despliegue de las mismas ansiedades en la evaluación por pares, donde les sociolingüistes del Reino Unido parecen incomódes por los estudios que centran la raza y el colonialismo, a pesar de las lógicas coloniales que se encuentran al centro de la disciplina (Heller y McElhinny <span>2022</span>). Esto es particularmente preocupante dado que la sociolingüística surgió simultáneamente con la organización anticolonial del Movimiento de Poder Negro en los años 1960, lo cual representaba el activismo comunitario que involucraba la exposición de la vigilancia antinegra sistémica de las prácticas lingüísticas en las escuelas.</p><p>El artículo de Flores y Rosa en el presente diálogo expresa cómo una perspectiva raciolingüística nos invita a interrogar las raíces coloniales de la sociolingüística y cómo se han empujado los asuntos de la raza, el colonialismo y la supremacía blanca a los márgenes disciplinarios. Una perspectiva raciolingüística busca deshacer asunciones dadas por sentadas sobre la lengua, la raza y la clase para interrogar cómo las lógicas coloniales británicas siguen dando forma a la sociedad moderna. Este enfoque interseccional ha sido fundamental al surgimiento de una perspectiva raciolingüística desde el Reino Unido que ha examinado la naturaleza mutuamente constitutiva de la raza, la clase y la lengua en contextos diferentes, incluyendo en las escuelas (Cushing, <span>2022</span>; Cushing y Snell, <span>2023</span>; Li Wei y García <span>2022</span>), en el proceso de ciudadanía del Reino Unido (Khan, <span>2021</span>), en la terapia del lenguaje, fonoaudiología y logopedia (<span>Farah f.c</span>.) y en zonas urbanas con altas poblaciones del sur de Asia (Sharma, <span>2016</span>; véase también Harris, <span>2006</span>). Estas investigaciones continúan una historia larga de estudios producidos por académiques marginalizades que expusieron cómo las lógicas coloniales y supremacistas blancos deslegitimaron las practicas lingüísticas de comunidades racializadas a mediados del siglo XX (p. ej., Coard, <span>1971</span>; Singh, <span>1988</span>). Sin embargo, estos nombres son típicamente borrados en los relatos históricos de les sociolingüistes del Reino Unido (véase Gilmour, <span>2020</span> para una excepción) de la misma manera en que el colonialismo y la antinegrura a menudo se pasan por alto en proyec","PeriodicalId":51486,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sociolinguistics","volume":"27 5","pages":"478-482"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2023-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/josl.12637","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136113152","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
<p>Flores and Rosa's proposition of a raciolinguistic approach provides an important political, historical, relational, and sensorial framework for understanding how people become raced and how social action becomes interpretable through a racialized lens. I build on this analysis to underscore the need for scholarship of race and language to consider a multidimensional analysis that is dynamic, historical, and cognizant of the complex power relations involved in linking and unlinking race and language. As I understand, their argument is a call to be wary of approaches that treat race and its relationship to language as decontextualized ahistorical categories across space and time.</p><p>Attention to the sensorial interface that impacts how race is interactionally experienced also means paying attention to the historical circumstances and relations of power that produce race as a perceivable category of social differentiation, be it through aspects of speech and language, physical appearance, genealogical ancestry, and/or whichever characteristics become historically associated with racial categories in a given place and time. This requires a simultaneous acknowledgment and analysis of race as a colonial construct, as an anchor of relations, and a basis for certain forms of identity. In this commentary, I briefly discuss racial categories as complex, multifaceted colonial orders. I then discuss a multi-vector framework that, in acknowledging the multidimensionality of racial instantiation, allows for a grounded analysis of how race and its relationship to linguistic phenomena may be constructed, experienced, reproduced, and challenged.</p><p>Thinking of coloniality as the productive of the modern social orders that produce race as an important vector of and proxy for sociocultural experiences across different historical and geopolitical situations allows us to analytically see how these categories also produce interstices and voids where the limitations and excesses of assumed categories are insufficient and do not neatly map onto lived experiences and conceptualizations of identity and language. To understand the multifaceted and lasting ways that European colonial projects have structured systems of knowledge, hierarchies, and culture to reproduce Eurocentric colonial power, we need to ask: What gets erased, left out, or overdetermined in the broad categories of language and race used to demographically trace patterns?</p><p>The discussion of race in this context can be understood in relationship to the distinctive forms of organizing differences within coloniality. The concept of coloniality (Quijano, <span>2000</span>) points to the epistemological conditions that are shaped along the political–economic conditions of colonial relations. Reyes (<span>2020</span>) applied this concept to ideas about mixed race and mixed language, to understand them not as attributes of persons and speech, but instead as an attribute of the listening subject pos
{"title":"Raciolinguistic approaches and multidimensional analyses of the links among race, language, and power","authors":"Sherina Feliciano-Santos","doi":"10.1111/josl.12639","DOIUrl":"10.1111/josl.12639","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Flores and Rosa's proposition of a raciolinguistic approach provides an important political, historical, relational, and sensorial framework for understanding how people become raced and how social action becomes interpretable through a racialized lens. I build on this analysis to underscore the need for scholarship of race and language to consider a multidimensional analysis that is dynamic, historical, and cognizant of the complex power relations involved in linking and unlinking race and language. As I understand, their argument is a call to be wary of approaches that treat race and its relationship to language as decontextualized ahistorical categories across space and time.</p><p>Attention to the sensorial interface that impacts how race is interactionally experienced also means paying attention to the historical circumstances and relations of power that produce race as a perceivable category of social differentiation, be it through aspects of speech and language, physical appearance, genealogical ancestry, and/or whichever characteristics become historically associated with racial categories in a given place and time. This requires a simultaneous acknowledgment and analysis of race as a colonial construct, as an anchor of relations, and a basis for certain forms of identity. In this commentary, I briefly discuss racial categories as complex, multifaceted colonial orders. I then discuss a multi-vector framework that, in acknowledging the multidimensionality of racial instantiation, allows for a grounded analysis of how race and its relationship to linguistic phenomena may be constructed, experienced, reproduced, and challenged.</p><p>Thinking of coloniality as the productive of the modern social orders that produce race as an important vector of and proxy for sociocultural experiences across different historical and geopolitical situations allows us to analytically see how these categories also produce interstices and voids where the limitations and excesses of assumed categories are insufficient and do not neatly map onto lived experiences and conceptualizations of identity and language. To understand the multifaceted and lasting ways that European colonial projects have structured systems of knowledge, hierarchies, and culture to reproduce Eurocentric colonial power, we need to ask: What gets erased, left out, or overdetermined in the broad categories of language and race used to demographically trace patterns?</p><p>The discussion of race in this context can be understood in relationship to the distinctive forms of organizing differences within coloniality. The concept of coloniality (Quijano, <span>2000</span>) points to the epistemological conditions that are shaped along the political–economic conditions of colonial relations. Reyes (<span>2020</span>) applied this concept to ideas about mixed race and mixed language, to understand them not as attributes of persons and speech, but instead as an attribute of the listening subject pos","PeriodicalId":51486,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Sociolinguistics","volume":"27 5","pages":"463-467"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9,"publicationDate":"2023-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/josl.12639","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136115919","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：